Unusual Handcuffs

[ruru67]

As for "Hot y work", most of the older Tower cuffs had chains that were forge welded as did the Hiatt Darby cuffs. The modern Indian copies of Darby cuffs are generally just brazed.

Yep, I suspect the S&W style swing through cuffs became so ubiquitous simply because they are cheap to make in volume on a mechanised production line. Those styles with more bending, brazing or welding would be more labour intensive to manufacture, but they do have a certain style to them which I find more interesting than modern style cuffs.

If it bothers you that S&W handcuffs can be picked with just a bent sewing pin, I suggest you get a pair of the old S&W Model 94 with the barrel keys or the more modern S&W Model 104 that takes a non-standard key.

Yep, but looking at that 104 key, while I'm sure it would defeat a sewing needle, it looks like a suitably bent paper clip would do the trick, although it would be a tricky bend to do without a pair of needle-nosed pliers. I've not handled a pair so there might be something about them I'm missing, but from this distance I'm not impressed. I actually like the model 94 lock more, but it again requires the key to double-lock ... and the first link I found about it was how to pick them, To be fair it did need to be picked, with tools you might not have to hand. I mean I'm sure the cylinder locks on my HSS9 knock-offs can be picked too with a proper tension tool and pick, but I'm not complaining about those ... again, apart from the fact I need the cylinder key to both engage and disengage the double lock.

(I really think there are just more and better games available if one can lock and double lock the cuffs without the keys present, e.g. in a lockbox or under the control of a partner. Law enforcement requirements are, obviously, different.)

As for drilling out the double lock slot for a padlock, I did that a few years back and documented the results here with photographs

I'd clearly forgotten that thread - I got the idea a year or two ago from someone on FetLife.

[Stahlketten]

The older S&W Model 90 handcuffs were much better made than the current production Model 100. I don't know if the Model 104 is better made than the Model 100 because my sample size is much smaller and I have not encountered any messed up ones yet.
I am not sure if you have seen my thread on S&W cuffs. The older Model 90 seems to be made of tougher steel and even though the newest ones you can find are probably at least 30 years old, they generally hold their shape pretty well. They may get some surface rust and corrosion but that is what happens with duty handcuffs that sit in a leather holster in all kinds of weather. The Model 100 even ones with the exposed rivets which are no earlier than 2011 seem to be much softer steel and get deformed in use quite frequently.
They are not really all machine assembled. There is some fitting and adjustments to make the jaws actually line up. There is a pretty good you-tube video on their construction.

The S&W handcuffs are probably so popular because of name recognition and because they tend to be very inexpensive. Their manufacture is basically just a bunch of sheet steel stampings with a few strategic drill and rivets spun into place for the lock case and then the guts are fit and a cross pin holds everything together.
The earlier stuff like Tower and Mattatuck needed some serious forging and machining for production.

As for using a paper clip to pick the Model 104 handcuffs, I don't believe that will work. I don't believe a sewing needle will work either because although it isn't obvious, the key and keyhole are much narrower. The problem though is that you can probably stick a needle through the double lock slot and disengage the double lock without much difficulty at which point, if you have a shim.....

Chicago Handcuff Company makes a nice set of higher security handcuffs that have a split bit key. They are not expensive for me to get but I don't know how that would work for exports since you are not in the USA.
ASP makes a multiple pawl lockset for European sales because apparently that is what is required there. They also make a split bit key and two pawl set that is supposed to be resistant to shims.

[ruru67]

The older S&W Model 90 handcuffs were much better made than the current production Model 100.

Note I don't have any actual S&W cuffs; I'm using "S&W style" to mean a pair of flat-steel swing-through cuffs, with a slotted double-lock. (I believe the flat steel swing-through style was actually invented by Peerless but I may be wrong about that.)

I have four sets of handcuffs; I've mentioned all four in this (and possibly another) thread:

• An old pair of Fury cuffs, simply swing-through double-lock cuffs (edge pin activated) with a two-link chain;
• S&W style hinged handcuffs, with S&W style double lock slot drilled out to accept a padlock (pictured upthread);
• Hiatt HSS9-style hinged cuffs with cylinder double-locks;
• H&R "Chinese style" cuffs (pictured upthread).

All of these are Chinese made, and all have square edges to the bracelets.

I note the two hinged styles have triple-layer pawls. I assume this is supposed to fail to release if only one or two of the layers are moved. I have to say that if this is the case, it doesn't work; the three layers tend to move together if you pick them with, say, a sewing needle. I suspect they're driven by a common spring, so there's nothing holding the un-picked pawls closed, and they're in contact with each other so move together due to simple friction between them. (I have moved them individually, so they're not stuck together.)

I have seen "high security" cuffs with three layer pawls, where there was an intervening static layer between each moving layer, and a comb shaped key with a separate tooth to engage each pawl layer. I'm sure that wouldn't stop a determined attack (e.g. using three separate bent paper clips) but at least the separate pawls would actually be doing something to make it harder.

As for using a paper clip to pick the Model 104 handcuffs, I don't believe that will work. I don't believe a sewing needle will work either because although it isn't obvious, the key and keyhole are much narrower. The problem though is that you can probably stick a needle through the double lock slot and disengage the double lock without much difficulty at which point, if you have a shim.....

I figured you'd form the end of the paper clip into a hook in a similar shape to the end of the key. I'm assuming from what I can see in pics that it's basically a standard handcuff, with a ward blocking the use of a standard key. You pick such locks simply my making a pick like an actual key that avoids the ward. Lock makers in every other security field gave up on warding as their main security feature over a century ago.

You may need a differently shaped paper clip end to shift the double lock. Again, I haven't handled the actual article so I may be missing something.

ASP makes a multiple pawl lockset for European sales because apparently that is what is required there. They also make a split bit key and two pawl set that is supposed to be resistant to shims.

I suspect it was an ASP or similar Euro cuff I'm referring to above.

[Stahlketten]

I believe that fitting even a sewing needle between the center post and the edge of the keyhole would be difficult with a S&W Model 104 handcuff because the key and keyhole are so narrow. I am not quite sure what is the working part of the bit.
You seem to be quite analytical, but I don't know if you can come up with a particularly accurate conclusion of manufacturing precision or quality without looking at an actual example of some of these handcuffs. Most of them are not particularly expensive, so there is really no reason not to get an example of the real thing.

Peerless (Gill family) did not actually invent the swing through handcuff. They just bought the patents from the fellow (Carney?) who did. I have examples of the early model Peerless 1912 handcuffs. They are not hard to get. Their key and function kind of explain why the double lock on many modern handcuffs is done with a peg on the back side of the key. On the initial models, there was no center post and the center of the key had a little pilot piece which on the second model became the means of setting the double lock. Although they are also laminated steel, they are much thicker and stronger sections than most modern handcuffs. That is why after 100+ years, many of them are still quite serviceable.

My wrists are fairly thin as well, but on most modern standard sized handcuffs, they will not spin freely because their oval shape is just a bit too narrow. Some models such as the S&W Model 1 do allow this as do a few slightly "oversized" versions.
Modern standard size Peerless tend to be the worst. ASP is pretty good in that respect.

[ruru67]

I believe that fitting even a sewing needle between the center post and the edge of the keyhole would be difficult with a S&W Model 104 handcuff because the key and keyhole are so narrow. I am not quite sure what is the working part of the bit.
You seem to be quite analytical, but I don't know if you can come up with a particularly accurate conclusion of manufacturing precision or quality without looking at an actual example of some of these handcuffs.

I don't expect a 104 could be picked with a needle - the warding would prevent that. Rather, I figure that a key that looks like a regular handcuff key with a notch in it to avoid a ward is probably exactly that, and simply replicating that shape (e.g. with a bent paper clip or other improvised tool) will open it.

I can be very resourceful when it comes to opening things ... so I have some difficulty finding any enthusiasm for the 104.

Peerless (Gill family) did not actually invent the swing through handcuff. They just bought the patents from the fellow (Carney?) who did. I have examples of the early model Peerless 1912 handcuffs. They are not hard to get. Their key and function kind of explain why the double lock on many modern handcuffs is done with a peg on the back side of the key. On the initial models, there was no center post and the center of the key had a little pilot piece which on the second model became the means of setting the double lock. Although they are also laminated steel, they are much thicker and stronger sections than most modern handcuffs. That is why after 100+ years, many of them are still quite serviceable.

Interesting ... and I can see why they would have gone to the centre pin, as a keyhole to admit a solid key will also admit a wide variety of pointy things that could be used to open them.

Talking of Peerless, I do like the look of their Medeco-locked high-security cuffs. The price at Handcuff Warehouse is far enough outside my budget that I'm not even going to bother asking if they can be shipped to NZ...

I'd really like cuffs - not necessarily swing-through - with wider contact areas in the bracelets and properly secure locks. I have some Indian and Chinese adjustable Darby cuffs - the Chinese ones are super easy top open without a key, and the Indian ones are just a little too big and my tiddly little hands can squeeze out of them.

The metal cuffs that get the most use around here are simple Chinese plates ones that padlock. I don't love them (they're fiddly to apply) but tick the comfort and security boxes.

[Stahlketten]

I should post a photograph of the S&W 104 key beside a regular standard handcuff key.
You will see that the 104 isn't just the standard key with a notch in the bit. The part that looks notched is actually longer than the standard bit. The key is also quite a bit thinner, so you cannot get a standard key into the keyhole.
There is not room to fit a sewing needle much less a paper clip.

I have a set of the Peerless with the high security locks. It makes the opening even narrower, so although it is higher security, we don't use them much because they are even less comfortable.

As for Indian Darbies, they come in all shapes and sizes. There really is no consistency. Sometimes there isn't even consistency between one side and the other. The British Darbies come in a few different sizes as well. Some are on the large side. Some are quite small. The problem there is that often they do not come with a key and the keys are not interchangeable. I actually have a set of English adjustable Darby handcuffs specifically for my Jailer when she agrees to wear them. Her hands are not small, but very narrow, so She can slip quite a few standard non adjustable handcuffs. After looking at enough of them and seeing how the pieces line up, you can pretty much tell from photographs whether or not the Indian Darby cuffs for sale are likely to work or not.
There is also the possibility of the Hiatt 104 Darby cuffs. Those work well but they are made of zinc instead of steel.
There are the typical Tower handcuffs but they tend to be expensive and finding keys is difficult.

[ruru67]

I should post a photograph of the S&W 104 key beside a regular standard handcuff key.

That would be interesting.

There is not room to fit a sewing needle much less a paper clip.

shrug ... I guess I'll always think of them as being a fairly simple modification of the same boring mechanism as most swing-through cuffs, so as I said, I have trouble finding much enthusiasm for them. They're still just swing-through cuffs, with narrow-edged bracelets - they may be harder to pick, but that's all they have going for them.

I have a set of the Peerless with the high security locks. It makes the opening even narrower, so although it is higher security, we don't use them much because they are even less comfortable.

I use wrist support gloves with swing-through cuffs, which helps. But yeah, I'd prefer a "bigger" bracelet to most swing-through edges. And the Chinese ones do need the gloves as they all have square edges to the bracelets.

As for Indian Darbies, they come in all shapes and sizes. There really is no consistency. Sometimes there isn't even consistency between one side and the other.

They're clearly novelty/replica items, not actually intended for restraining real people. I'm pretty sure Indian police use swing-through cuffs like everyone else. So it's no surprise the quality control is ... lacking. I think they're (marginally) better than the Chinese Darbies in terms of security (or would be if I couldn't slip my hands out of them) as the clearances are much tighter and the spring stronger, but a quality item they definitely are not!

I note that most of the Chinese Darbies available online are tiny - too small for me. They close, but only by holding my wrists at a weird (and uncomfortable) angle, sort of across the cuff rather than "in" it. I've actually tossed a couple of these out (one advertised a different larger cuff, but supplied another tiny one). The ones I have kept are larger but as I noted, have terrible locking mechanisms - even to the point that the bolts appear to be mounted back to front. These I have two of, one long chain the other with a short chain (neither have swivels); the long chain ones were advertised as leg irons, but the cuffs are the same size, and ... well, my ankles ain't that small...

I have small hands / wrists. When the choice of sizes is "male" vs "female", I always get the female size, and even so, cuffs need to fit fairly well to prevent slipping out of them...

[Stahlketten]

Regarding Darby handcuffs, they were in fairly common use for the military and police through about 1950 or 1960. Many of the collectible ones have the "Broad Arrow" MOD stamping typical of military equipment. Some of the Indian and Pakistani Darby copies are no worse made though they tend to be brazed rather than forge welded as I mentioned earlier. Functionally, they work just fine. Others are just plain trash.
There are some old American made Darby handcuffs from between the Civil War and the 1930s that don't always look different from the Indian versions but generally tend to be very well made and functional. There were some that were made in South Africa that were available a couple decades ago and they were quite well made and definitely intended to be used. They were sold as military surplus for a very short time.

As for swing through cuffs, there are all kinds. I have a pretty god representative collection. Some are very easy to pick and some are not.
If the sharp edges bother you, take a file to them. If they are Chinese copies, they probably were not that expensive, especially since the genuine article often is not that expensive. You can often find good stuff from eBay for very little money.

[ruru67]

If the sharp edges bother you, take a file to them.

I figure that if I do that it takes the plating off them, making them vulnerable to rust, and they'll still have narrow edges, so I'd still want some kind of protection if used for any length of time.

I'm not really a collector of these; I grab things that I find interesting but I'm looking at how they can be used rather than just having them for the sake of collecting them.

By the way, here's a Chinese cuff that has three separated pawls: https://nextorch.en.made-in-china.com/p ... cuffs.html. There are hinged versions of this as well. It does have a solid key which makes for an open (rather than centre-pinned) keyhole, giving a lot of room for inserting picking tools. But if the three pawls are actually separately sprung, picking it would be difficult one-handed. (A common spring would pretty much defeat the purpose of multiple pawls, as it does for the cuffs I have.)

I don't know how one would get these (that site sells in quantity 600 or more...). But interesting to see what's out there.

[Stahlketten]

I don't worry too much about rust on the toys that get used a lot. You will find that even with nickel plating, they are not all that rust resistant. If the rounded edge makes them more convenient to use, then I would just file on them unless they have some historical or collector value.
Rounded edges don't sound like they make a great difference, but I know that they do. An example is the American Munitions / American Handcuff Company products. Their military line has all sharp edges. Their commercial products have all rounded edges. The difference is very noticeable. I choose not to file on those because even though they were originally not expensive, they do have some collector value and the "sharp edges" are really not that bad.
On Indian Darby handcuffs that are too big, I have sometimes filed an additional notch so they could close tighter. Very often that works if the cuff is shaped right and if not, it might be bent or hammered until it is shaped right.